PKSOI/GLOBAL TRENDS CASE STUDIES The Foreign Terrorist Designation of Boko Haram | Page 3

Case Study # 0417-01
PKSOI TRENDS GLOBAL CASE STUDY SERIES
The “Foreign Terrorist Designation” of Boko Haram 1
Ryan McCannell, USAID Advisor to the U.S. Army War College
“We are writing to urge you to immediately designate the Nigerian Islamist group Boko Haram a Foreign Terrorist
Organization (FTO)…. We are deeply concerned that Boko Haram’s tactics, targeting, and fundraising operations
appear to be increasingly international in scope, including within the U.S. Homeland…. We must ensure that the
Federal government does not become complacent and allow bureaucratic stovepipes to prevent us from addressing a
critical terrorist threat.”
– Text of a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
from Reps. Peter King (R-NY) and Patrick Meehan (R-PA)
U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee
March 30, 2012
Introduction
In the spring of 2012, with U.S. elections approaching, the Republican majority members of the U.S. House of Repre-
sentatives Committee on Homeland Security introduced a bill called the “Boko Haram Terrorism Designation Act of
2012.” The bill’s aim was to mandate then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to determine whether or not Boko Ha-
ram, an emergent violent insurgent network in northeastern Nigeria, met the legal criteria defining a Foreign Terrorist
Organization, or FTO. Such a designation would open several new avenues for investigating, prosecuting, and applying
political pressure on those providing financial and material support to the network.
Why was the bill even necessary? On the face of it, the FTO designation decision might seem like a no-brainer: an
obvious action to take against such a dangerous Islamist extremist group. After all, in the previous three years, Boko
Haram’s self-proclaimed jihad against the Government of Nigeria – a key U.S. ally in West Africa – had already killed
hundreds of Nigerians and resulted in a deadly attack against a United Nations compound in Nigeria’s capital, Abuja.
But in fact, this decision involved several U.S. government agencies and vocal outside groups in a fierce debate, with
powerful advocates both for and against the FTO designation. This case study explores the arguments made by each
side of the Boko Haram FTO designation debate to illustrate the challenges involved in effectively countering violent
extremist organizations (VEOs).
Boko Haram in a Nutshell
Centered in north-eastern Nigeria, Boko Haram – whose nickname roughly translates to “Western education is forbid-
den” 2 – began as a religiously oriented protest movement aimed at purifying Muslim communities in response to the
perceived corruption of northern Nigeria’s traditional elites and its secular government. Following the mysterious death
of its founder, Muhammadu Yusuf, while in police custody in 2009, Boko Haram declared a holy war against the gov-
ernment and traditional leaders. By May 2012, the group had gained international notoriety for numerous bombings
and other attacks against Nigerian government and civilian targets, causing hundreds of deaths.
Boko Haram also claimed responsibility for an August 2011 car bomb at the United Nations (UN) local headquarters
in Abuja, the Nigerian capital, which killed 23 people and injured 75 others. 3